Likelihood of Humans Expanding Out of Our Own Solar System
- Thread starter Bannik
- Start date
I think both you and GangProbed need to think about the phrasing of your statements / poll questions , it's coloring the results you get.
Barring unforseen developments, I see it as technically possible with our current understanding of how things work. It's just a long, expesive process that has several steps.
First we need to be able to build self-sustaining orbital colonies. Asteroid mining would be useful. Then it's just a matter of drifting further afield -- assuming that resources don't get so thin that we can't replace what we use up / lose. Of course, if you're seriously into living in space, recycling efficiency is important. Sure, it's not flitting about like Star Trek, but it would serve to spread humanity to other stars.
Now, given a breakthrough, such as the realization of the bowlderization Heavyside made of Maxwell's equations, or who knows what, things just get easier to do.
Barring unforseen developments, I see it as technically possible with our current understanding of how things work. It's just a long, expesive process that has several steps.
First we need to be able to build self-sustaining orbital colonies. Asteroid mining would be useful. Then it's just a matter of drifting further afield -- assuming that resources don't get so thin that we can't replace what we use up / lose. Of course, if you're seriously into living in space, recycling efficiency is important. Sure, it's not flitting about like Star Trek, but it would serve to spread humanity to other stars.
Now, given a breakthrough, such as the realization of the bowlderization Heavyside made of Maxwell's equations, or who knows what, things just get easier to do.
- Joined
- Feb 8, 2002
- Messages
- 1,814
Ever is a long time. Almost an eternity in fact.
Timble2
Imaginary Person
- Joined
- Feb 9, 2003
- Messages
- 6,047
- Location
- In a Liminal Zone
I think it's probable that barring the end of civilization as we know it we'll eventually have the technology to go to the stars. Possibly very slowly, but possible.
With sufficient motivation even now we could push an unmanned probe in the general direction of Proxima Centauri, and see it arrive within an average human life span...solar sails might the be way out there. The likelhood that it would be going like a bat out of hell by the time it got there and traverse any planetary system in a matter of days with just time for a few quick pictures, might limit it's usefullness.
Whether we go to the stars is a matter for unknowable future attitudes, by the time we have the technology then the human race may have turned in on itself finding all the universe it needs inside its own heads or inside virtual worlds.
It's hard to believe though that there wouldn't be someone who will be willing to head out into deep space, even with the certainty it's a one-way trip
With sufficient motivation even now we could push an unmanned probe in the general direction of Proxima Centauri, and see it arrive within an average human life span...solar sails might the be way out there. The likelhood that it would be going like a bat out of hell by the time it got there and traverse any planetary system in a matter of days with just time for a few quick pictures, might limit it's usefullness.
Whether we go to the stars is a matter for unknowable future attitudes, by the time we have the technology then the human race may have turned in on itself finding all the universe it needs inside its own heads or inside virtual worlds.
It's hard to believe though that there wouldn't be someone who will be willing to head out into deep space, even with the certainty it's a one-way trip
- Joined
- Sep 22, 2002
- Messages
- 1,189
I think it's a possibility, but can't really see it happening in my lifetime ...
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2001
- Messages
- 845
We'll have to get off this planet sooner or later because it's not always going to be here. Even the sun has a limited lifespan so eventually it's going to be a case of do or die.
A
Anonymous
Guest
The technology is likely to become possible but we won't ever do it. Indeed, if we ever establish any sizeable, self-sustaining, self-perpetuating, colonies off-Earth -moon colonies, Mars colonies, asteroid mines, orbital factories, terraformed environments, that sort of thing- I'll be very surprised.
So far as I see it, there are political pressures that will keep us all Earth-bound (or nearly all: a tiny number -maybe an absolute max of a few hundred at any given time- will faff about doing the odd bit of this and that between Earth, Luna and Mars for the political prestige of the parent nation(s)); unless there's a paradigm shift in public attitudes and political thinking in the immediate short-term future, national budgets will be increasingly focussed on feeding the population in the face of increasing ecological and economic collapse, providing short-term solutions to recurring problems such as famine, flood and drought, and on bolstering the increased defence spending that will be needed to combat the unrest caused by the food shortages, health scares and the environmental damage.
Add to this the historical lesson that colonies always seem to end up becoming first independent of, and then competitors to, the parent state. And then add the lobbying of special-interest groups opposed to off-world technological development (maybe extremists, yes: but we should have learned by now that the fact that a view is extreme (or even irrational) will not stop human beings -or even politicians- adopting it). I'm forced to conclude that the paradigm shift needed to protect our species' long-term survival chances will never occur.
So I give us about another millenium, tops, and then we'll be extinct. The future is quite bleak IMO. (And what a waste of an almost limitless potential.)
So far as I see it, there are political pressures that will keep us all Earth-bound (or nearly all: a tiny number -maybe an absolute max of a few hundred at any given time- will faff about doing the odd bit of this and that between Earth, Luna and Mars for the political prestige of the parent nation(s)); unless there's a paradigm shift in public attitudes and political thinking in the immediate short-term future, national budgets will be increasingly focussed on feeding the population in the face of increasing ecological and economic collapse, providing short-term solutions to recurring problems such as famine, flood and drought, and on bolstering the increased defence spending that will be needed to combat the unrest caused by the food shortages, health scares and the environmental damage.
Add to this the historical lesson that colonies always seem to end up becoming first independent of, and then competitors to, the parent state. And then add the lobbying of special-interest groups opposed to off-world technological development (maybe extremists, yes: but we should have learned by now that the fact that a view is extreme (or even irrational) will not stop human beings -or even politicians- adopting it). I'm forced to conclude that the paradigm shift needed to protect our species' long-term survival chances will never occur.
So I give us about another millenium, tops, and then we'll be extinct. The future is quite bleak IMO. (And what a waste of an almost limitless potential.)
A
Anonymous
Guest
But we must go!
look at all the lovely new planets out there!
and this is how it could be done.
But, realistically, we might very well confine ourselves for millions of years to our own planet, entertaining ourselves with hyperralistic virtual worlds; this technology could become so good that we will lose all incentive to go out there, and dreams of colonisation will be acheived in simulation only;
it would be much cheaper too.
look at all the lovely new planets out there!
and this is how it could be done.
But, realistically, we might very well confine ourselves for millions of years to our own planet, entertaining ourselves with hyperralistic virtual worlds; this technology could become so good that we will lose all incentive to go out there, and dreams of colonisation will be acheived in simulation only;
it would be much cheaper too.
A
Anonymous
Guest
Either our species leaves, or it dies.
A
Anonymous
Guest
too lazy.
We'll probably sit around for another millenia saying, "what's the hurry...we've got ages..."
Just like we did when we had to leave mars.
We'll probably sit around for another millenia saying, "what's the hurry...we've got ages..."
Just like we did when we had to leave mars.
A
Anonymous
Guest
Interesting poll, thanx Bannik.
This kind of reminds me of the song Sleeping Satellite by Tasmin Archer. Did we squander the chance? Still we try to justify the waste for a taste of man's greatest adventure...
The dream of space is not dead imho, but on the other hand it's not in vibrant, glowing health either. Clarke, for instance, was clearly a man who predicted that we would carry on expanding into space, and that humankind would be all the better for it. Colonies on Mars, the Moon, and Ganymede; big spaceships, and a more settled and peaceful world to help pay for it.
Well, even the most diehard space travel enthusiast would have to admit, it patently hasn't happened. No human has left earth orbit for over thirty years, for goodness sake. Now we have AIDS, drugs, environmental problems, and overpopulation to contend with, as well as the ever-present poverty and hunger which has haunted the human race since the year dot. It's not the ideal time to launch a trillion-dollar manned spaceship to Alpha Centauri.
I think there's no doubt we will go to Mars, God willing, and establish a Moonbase or two. Also, I am not in doubt that humankind is capable of leaving the solar system. The first unmanned interstellar probes have already left the solar system, after all. I guess the question is, has humankind got the appetite for such an adventure? I have my doubts.
I think it's impossible to say at this time. If it does happen, it will probably not be for a very long time.
Big Bill Robinson
This kind of reminds me of the song Sleeping Satellite by Tasmin Archer. Did we squander the chance? Still we try to justify the waste for a taste of man's greatest adventure...
The dream of space is not dead imho, but on the other hand it's not in vibrant, glowing health either. Clarke, for instance, was clearly a man who predicted that we would carry on expanding into space, and that humankind would be all the better for it. Colonies on Mars, the Moon, and Ganymede; big spaceships, and a more settled and peaceful world to help pay for it.
Well, even the most diehard space travel enthusiast would have to admit, it patently hasn't happened. No human has left earth orbit for over thirty years, for goodness sake. Now we have AIDS, drugs, environmental problems, and overpopulation to contend with, as well as the ever-present poverty and hunger which has haunted the human race since the year dot. It's not the ideal time to launch a trillion-dollar manned spaceship to Alpha Centauri.
I think there's no doubt we will go to Mars, God willing, and establish a Moonbase or two. Also, I am not in doubt that humankind is capable of leaving the solar system. The first unmanned interstellar probes have already left the solar system, after all. I guess the question is, has humankind got the appetite for such an adventure? I have my doubts.
I think it's impossible to say at this time. If it does happen, it will probably not be for a very long time.
Big Bill Robinson
A
Anonymous
Guest
I've always imagined that there was likely to be a finite window during which time manned exploration / colonisation was possible. The beginning of that period would be when the technology was available to do it (i.e. round about now) and the end would be when the significant quantity of earthbound natural resources required to do it had expired. (If started early enough would could use the resources of the newly colonised worlds to continue the process.)
To actually start the process during this window of opportunity would require a huge political will to begin something that would only start paying off over decades, while in the short-term it would lead to major expenses (colonisation or more hospitals?). I'm really not sure that there will ever be the political will, which saddens me because if we don't do this, eventually the entire human race will (in the fashion of "all your eggs in one basket") eventually be destroyed by some earthbound apocalypse. As it stands currently, the human race will never survive beyond the red giant phase of the star that gave us life. (Truly the alpha and omega.
)
To actually start the process during this window of opportunity would require a huge political will to begin something that would only start paying off over decades, while in the short-term it would lead to major expenses (colonisation or more hospitals?). I'm really not sure that there will ever be the political will, which saddens me because if we don't do this, eventually the entire human race will (in the fashion of "all your eggs in one basket") eventually be destroyed by some earthbound apocalypse. As it stands currently, the human race will never survive beyond the red giant phase of the star that gave us life. (Truly the alpha and omega.
)
A
Anonymous
Guest
Unfortunately, the world isn’t geared towards the betterment of mankind as a whole, more towards feathering one’s own nest which means staying terrestrial bound as long as space remains prohibitively expensive. No market = no investment. Plus, we’ve got to spend $400bn on defence, it seems, on things that are destructive rather than constructive.
It strikes me that the predictions of Clarke and co. were probably at their most feverish around the time of the Space Race when there was a real optimism about space travel, but we now all know it was about keeping pace with the Soviets rather than any real attempt to take humanity a step forward.
The problems, I imagine, are pretty formidable in engineering terms. The huge distances and times involved, the lack of gravity, cosmic radiation, oxygen, energy, the hostility of space outside our atmosphere, and the large manufacturing base and raw materials required to keep a large population going. Can we live without the lack of natural sunlight, true terrestrial landscapes, and the chaotic harmony of the earth’s ecosystem. And how do you spend all that spare time? I imagine living in such a colony would be a pretty tough and probably rather dull enterprise, lots of black sky, rocky landscapes and white plastic. And then you’re at the mercy of hoping there is no catastrophic or creeping structural failure in the plastic bubble you’re dependent upon. These problems can probably be overcome but not during my time in this dimension, particularly if there’s no market for it.
It strikes me that the predictions of Clarke and co. were probably at their most feverish around the time of the Space Race when there was a real optimism about space travel, but we now all know it was about keeping pace with the Soviets rather than any real attempt to take humanity a step forward.
The problems, I imagine, are pretty formidable in engineering terms. The huge distances and times involved, the lack of gravity, cosmic radiation, oxygen, energy, the hostility of space outside our atmosphere, and the large manufacturing base and raw materials required to keep a large population going. Can we live without the lack of natural sunlight, true terrestrial landscapes, and the chaotic harmony of the earth’s ecosystem. And how do you spend all that spare time? I imagine living in such a colony would be a pretty tough and probably rather dull enterprise, lots of black sky, rocky landscapes and white plastic. And then you’re at the mercy of hoping there is no catastrophic or creeping structural failure in the plastic bubble you’re dependent upon. These problems can probably be overcome but not during my time in this dimension, particularly if there’s no market for it.
A
Anonymous
Guest
This is an argument in favour of terraforming. In a strange, almost perverse fashion, it would be great if it was demonstrated that Mars had never harboured life. To my mind, it's the possible presence (current or historical) of life on Mars that provides the greatest barrier to any terraforming attempt. If Mars were truly barren, then a terraforming program (slowly and incrementally over decades and centuries) could be one of the greatest acheivements of the human race.Dark Detective said:
A
Anonymous
Guest
Any ideas how would we go about it?
I've mentioned this before, but I read an essay on terraforming Venus, which involved rockets seeding the CO2 rich atmosphere with algae, which would be hardy enough to survive and munch the CO2 converting it into oxygen, cooling the planet in a reverse greenhouse effect. This would then cause condensation of the water vapour in the atmosphere leading to the title of the essay: The Big Rain. Lakes and oceans form, and Venus becomes far more hospitable than the vision of Hell it is now.
The main problem, though, is the simply enormous resources (not to mention time) it would take.
I've mentioned this before, but I read an essay on terraforming Venus, which involved rockets seeding the CO2 rich atmosphere with algae, which would be hardy enough to survive and munch the CO2 converting it into oxygen, cooling the planet in a reverse greenhouse effect. This would then cause condensation of the water vapour in the atmosphere leading to the title of the essay: The Big Rain. Lakes and oceans form, and Venus becomes far more hospitable than the vision of Hell it is now.
The main problem, though, is the simply enormous resources (not to mention time) it would take.
A
Anonymous
Guest
Terraforming;
http://www.orionsarm.com/tech/terraforming.html
and for worlds that are too small or too cold to terraform;
Worldhouses
http://www.orionsarm.com/civ/Worldhouses.html
realistically again, it will be quite difficult to terraform Mars- the work of thousands of years;
and Venus- well, the worst problem there is the lack of rotation.
I am more inclined to think that worldhouses and medium sized ring habitats made of carbon fullerenes
like these
http://www.orionsarm.com/worlds/Arkab_Prior.html
would be the best option.
http://www.orionsarm.com/tech/terraforming.html
and for worlds that are too small or too cold to terraform;
Worldhouses
http://www.orionsarm.com/civ/Worldhouses.html
realistically again, it will be quite difficult to terraform Mars- the work of thousands of years;
and Venus- well, the worst problem there is the lack of rotation.
I am more inclined to think that worldhouses and medium sized ring habitats made of carbon fullerenes
like these
http://www.orionsarm.com/worlds/Arkab_Prior.html
would be the best option.
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2004
- Messages
- 29,622
- Location
- Out of Bounds
One of the most recent Nobel laureates has cast cold water on the notion of humans colonizing worlds beyond our own solar system.
FULL STORY: https://www.afp.com/en/news/826/humans-will-not-migrate-other-planets-nobel-winner-says-doc-1l97962
FULL STORY: https://www.afp.com/en/news/826/humans-will-not-migrate-other-planets-nobel-winner-says-doc-1l97962